Stefan Pochmann writes:
> Mark Dickinson wrote:
> > Unrelated question: under this proposal, what would you want
> > `Fraction(10**400) / 1e200` to do?
> Btw the full error message I get for that is "OverflowError:
> integer division result too large for a float". Even for
>
Gerrit Holl writes:
> If voting is limited to a select group (which could be as small as
> Python core developers, or as large as anyone who has ever had a pull
> request merged into cpython, or something in-between), then a vote
> could be a way to measure opinions after a lengthy discussion
[Mark Dickinson ]
>
> There's definitely potential benefit in some of this - e.g., It Would Be Nice
> If
> `-1 * complex(inf, 0.0)` gave `complex(-inf, -0.0)` instead of the current
> result of
> `complex(-inf, nan)`.
Except replacing -1 with "-1.0" or "complex(-1)" would presumably
On Mon, Feb 21, 2022 at 12:24 PM Mark Dickinson wrote:
> e.g., It Would Be Nice If `-1 * complex(inf, 0.0)` gave `complex(-inf,
> -0.0)` instead of the current result of `complex(-inf, nan)`. But the price
> in added complexity - both conceptual complexity and implementation
> complexity - seems
On Sun, Feb 20, 2022 at 3:59 PM Stefan Pochmann
wrote:
> Mark Dickinson wrote:
> > Unrelated question: under this proposal, what would you want
> > `Fraction(10**400) / 1e200` to do?
>
> Somehow that sounds like a trick question :-). I'd say 1e200, yes,
> although didn't think much about it.
>
As it seems there's a more appropriate list to take this, I'll just say
thanks to all who replied with great information and thoughts and leave
at that for now.
Eliot
On 21.02.22 00:40, Cameron Simpson wrote:
On 21Feb2022 09:12, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
On Sun, Feb 20, 2022 at 09:56:18AM
